Study Shows Government Agencies can Benefit from Lean Process Improvement, but Few Take Advantage
Government leaders have increasingly implemented Lean process techniques in an attempt to make taxpayer-funded operations more efficient, but the use has been limited, a new study shows.
The report, conducted jointly by CPS HR Consulting and the American Society for Quality (ASQ) Government Division, found that while Lean process improvement has made government operations more efficient, substantial roadblocks still exist that have kept the process from getting widely implemented.
However, those agencies that have incorporated Lean techniques have reported success.
“Lean process improvement is capable of producing substantial positive improvement in the efficiency and effectiveness of government,” according to the report.
Successes reported by the 24 government agencies surveyed included:
- A 61% reduction in process steps
- A 60% reduction in process time
- A 19% improvement in error-free work
Putting Lean to Use
ASQ has long advocated the use of Lean process improvement as a fundamental part of government operations, which often are burdened by inefficient processes.
Lean process improvement is not a complicated idea, although implementation can prove difficult because it challenges long-held assumptions about how a process should work.
Used within large organizations, Lean offers a system by which organizations map a process to understand all the details of how it works. This, in turn, allows for the identification of parts of the process that are wasteful of time and money, including duplication, frequently missed steps that must later be corrected or unnecessary steps that can simply be eliminated.
Eventually, the idea is to streamline a process to where it’s done correctly the first time.
Potential Roadblocks
The study, conducted in the summer of 2016, included government agencies from 10 U.S. states, the District of Columbia and Canada. In total, 24 agencies responded to the survey.
About two-thirds of the government agencies reported that they used Lean primarily to improve timeliness and effectiveness of a process. Almost half (45%) targeted processes within an agency that did not directly impact service to the public, but rather sought to improve internal operations.
The government agencies in the survey faced numerous challenges. They included priorities that changed with new political leadership, a lack of staffing support for implementing changes and the fact that a more efficient operation could result in staffing or budget cuts.
The study also found that even when implemented, Lean techniques often are used only for a short period of time.
“Based on the survey results, it is clear that Lean and quality practices are only used in short cycles, and in about one-third of all government offices,” Richard Mallory, a leader on the survey, said in a news release. “The use of Lean and quality improvement tools as a temporary ‘fix’ denies government its greatest hope of across-the-board improvements in efficiency and effectiveness.”
The very benefits of Lean techniques pose a problem for some government agencies, according to the report.
“Employees of units considering Lean process improvement are sensitive to the fact that their efforts could reduce the numbers of positions required or result in budget reductions in their agency, and specifically in the office in which they work,” the report stated.
Recommendations
The report recommended that agency leaders must assure those who create process improvement that they will not lose their own jobs as a result of the work. Otherwise, they note, the “root causes of inefficiency will never be revealed.”
ASQ also recommended the use of the company’s Process Management Standards and System Management Standard to create a scorecard that can be used to ascertain progress in reducing government agency inefficiencies.
Further, ASQ recommended that a scorecard become a routine part of government operations with the goal of creating excellent, efficient service at the lowest possible cost.
